GE’s CAP compared to Prosci’s ADKAR

I’ve been doing some work recently for a client that uses the Prosci ADKAR model for change management. I’ve been asked a few times how the ADKAR model/process compares with the CAP model/process. I’m not an expert in ADKAR by any means, but based on what I’ve learned so far, the table above summarizes the high-level comparison.

One difference that I’ve observed (on an admittedly small sample of ADKAR-based project work – so I could be wrong here…) is that while both focus on stakeholder alignment with the goals of the project team, CAP places a great deal of emphasis on ensuring alignment WITHIN the project team, especially in the early stages of the project. Based on my experience, this is a critical success factor that must be included in any change management strategy.

Another difference seems to be that CAP digs deep into understanding the potential & real sources of resistance to change before developing an influence strategy.

I think it’s important to note here… I am a big advocate for Prosci. Prosci is doing more than any other organization to make Change Management into a recognized, respected discipline. They are the only organization I am aware of promoting a Change Management Capability Maturity Model. They are the driving force behind the Association of Change Management Professionals (ACMP) – a legitimate forum for the sharing of best practices in Change Management. And of course, they are providing certification training and support for the ADKAR methodology globally. ‘Nuff said.

2 responses to “GE’s CAP compared to Prosci’s ADKAR”

Hmmm…. I’ve never commented on one of my own posts. Anyway…
I’ve been deeply immersed in a Prosci-based client for just over a year (as of this writing) and I can say with certainty that the failure to align the project team around the vision for the change initiative (above and beyond the technical implementation) has dire consequences. Ugh! Go slow up-front to go fast later. It’s counter-intuitive but it is absolutely true